# Sotomayor: Maybe a Racist. Definitely an Egomaniac. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 16, 2009, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269 "2009-07-16T21:54:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/41 "2009-07-17T18:38:59Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > But that’s not what she said. That is not the debate. She was not pointing to the body of justices, but to individual justices, comparing herself as a Latina to white males. No, she is comparing a Latina woman with richness of experience to a white male without that richness. Nowhere does she say that either a Latina or a woman are better. The point she made just before was that some judges, whom she chose because there would be no dispute that they were wise, voted for discrimination due to a lack of experience with it. And she of course immediately noted that this wasn’t always the case. The comment on sex discrimination cases shows that being a woman helps also. Do you deny this point? > [@](#): > > Personal experiences affect the facts that judges choose to see. Do you deny that members of minorities have different experiences from members of majorities? Isn’t it the slightest bit possible that a male judge considering a sex discrimination case on a panel with a female judge will consider things slightly differently than one on an all-male panel? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/42 "2009-07-17T18:54:57Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > No, she is comparing a Latina woman with richness of experience to a white male without that richness. Nowhere does she say that either a Latina or a woman are better. [QUOTE=Sotomayor] I would hope that a wise Latina woman with the richness of her experiences would more often than not reach a better conclusion than a white male who hasn’t lived that life [/QUOTE] . These are _her_ words. She thinks that a wise _Latina_ would _more often tha_n not reach a _better_ decision than a white male. Tell me, if one Judge X is _more often than not_ able to reach a _better_ decision than another judge, wouldn’t you think Judge X to be a superior judge? Seriously, how do you arrive at a different conclusion? [QUOTE=Voyager] Do you deny that members of minorities have different experiences from members of majorities? Isn’t it the slightest bit possible that a male judge considering a sex discrimination case on a panel with a female judge will consider things slightly differently than one on an all-male panel? [/QUOTE] Differently, yes. Better, no, not necessarily. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/43 "2009-07-17T20:00:03Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > . > > These are _her_ words. She thinks that a wise _Latina_ would _more often tha_n not reach a _better_ decision than a white male. > > Tell me, if one Judge X is _more often than not_ able to reach a _better_ decision than another judge, wouldn’t you think Judge X to be a superior judge? It appears to me that she’s talking about reaching a “better conclusion” on a fairly narrow subject - specifically, cases relating to racial or gender discrimination. Which I don’t think is all that objectionable an observation. We all agree, I think, that Brown v. the Board of Education was a correct decision that overturned several decades worth of bad court rulings. I don’t think it’s particularly controversial to suggest that, if the Supreme Court had someone consisted of mostly black justices, something like Brown would have been decided much earlier. Not because white justices would be dumber than black ones, but because blacks would have a more immediate and complete understanding of the effects of prejudice on the individual, and would have used this knowledge to inform their rulings. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/44 "2009-07-17T20:07:54Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > It appears to me that she’s talking about reaching a “better conclusion” on a fairly narrow subject - specifically, cases relating to racial or gender discrimination. Which I don’t think is all that objectionable an observation. We all agree, I think, that Brown v. the Board of Education was a correct decision that overturned several decades worth of bad court rulings. I don’t think it’s particularly controversial to suggest that, if the Supreme Court had someone consisted of mostly black justices, something like Brown would have been decided much earlier. Not because white justices would be dumber than black ones, but because blacks would have a more immediate and complete understanding of the effects of prejudice on the individual, and would have used this knowledge to inform their rulings. I might agree that a more diverse court would benefit from a richer understanding of the case, which may lead them to a wiser decision as a court. But her point is not that the body of the court would be wiser in total, but that she, by virtue of being Latina would be wiser than a white male. The difference is the individual vs the court as a whole. This is clearly racist. Now one may argue that it was a poor wording, etc., but that IS racist. And someone who believes that (leaving aside whether she actually does) does NOT belong near a gavel. Also, it’s quite possible that someone with her background might make a less wise ruling, based on her bias. Which I think played a role in the firefighters’ case. ---
**Author:** ![Labrador\_Deceiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7c8e57/32.png) [@Labrador\_Deceiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Labrador_Deceiver)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/45 "2009-07-17T20:14:13Z")
> [@The\_Weird\_One](#): > > That’s what I get from reading the three paragraphs that were quoted here. The statement in itself is racist, but the paragraph that follows it suggests that she was referring specifically to cases of race and sex discrimination. Because her record doesn’t show any racism in her rulings, I’m willing to give her a pass on this one. So does the paragraph immediately preceding it. Unfortunately, that was left out of the quote above: > [@](#): > > In our private conversations, Judge Cedarbaum has pointed out to me that seminal decisions in race and sex discrimination cases have come from Supreme Courts composed exclusively of white males. I agree that this is significant but I also choose to emphasize that the people who argued those cases before the Supreme Court which changed the legal landscape ultimately were largely people of color and women. I recall that Justice Thurgood Marshall, Judge Connie Baker Motley, the first black woman appointed to the federal bench, and others of the NAACP argued Brown v. Board of Education. Similarly, Justice Ginsburg, with other women attorneys, was instrumental in advocating and convincing the Court that equality of work required equality in terms and conditions of employment. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/46 "2009-07-17T20:19:51Z")
I agree with her 100% that we need to accept our own biases to overcome them. I’ve been arguing that around here for a long time since so many liberals think that by virtue of being liberal that they aren’t racist/sexist/bigotted. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/47 "2009-07-17T20:21:40Z")
What concerns me most is the idea that she railroads lawyers that Senator Graham brought up. I don’t know how much he was cherry-picking though. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/48 "2009-07-17T20:24:22Z")
> [@Nametag](#): > > Nothing personal, **Gato** , just had to shake the tickle out of my funny bone. I prefer to think of myself as a soft moron too, as opposed to all the hard morons we have around here. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/49 "2009-07-17T20:26:16Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I might agree that a more diverse court would benefit from a richer understanding of the case, which may lead them to a wiser decision as a court. But her point is not that the body of the court would be wiser in total, but that she, by virtue of being Latina would be wiser than a white male. The difference is the individual vs the court as a whole. This is clearly racist. Now one may argue that it was a poor wording, etc., but that IS racist. And someone who believes that (leaving aside whether she actually does) does NOT belong near a gavel. If she was talking about being wiser in all subjects and circumstances, sure, that would be racist. I don’t think it’s racist to say that a Latina would have more insight than a white person into issues that directly effect Latinas is racist, though. Rather, it strikes me as entirely self-evident. > [@](#): > > Also, it’s quite possible that someone with her background might make a less wise ruling, based on her bias. Which I think played a role in the firefighters’ case. That’s not a bad point, although I’d say that’s covered by the justice being “wise,” which presumably means, “aware of, and able to avoid, any biases they may have.” Whether Sotomayor is actually that wise is, of course, a separate issue. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/50 "2009-07-17T20:28:53Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > I prefer to think of myself as a soft moron too, as opposed to all the hard morons we have around here. 😉 That works if someone calls you a moron, but what if they call you a dick? ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/51 "2009-07-17T20:31:25Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > This is an example of right wingers hearing what they want to hear, not what was actually said. It’s always entertaining to see upper class, white, Christian, American males – the most priveleged, and powerful people in the history of the world – try to paint themselves as a persecuted minority. Can you blame them? Liberal politics have defined the debate as being whoever can prove the most victimization is the group that should have the most power. I agree with you that it’s silly for white males to try this tactic, really what should be done is make every attempt to break this tactic so that it is discredited and referred to with nothing but derision. That’s going to take a while, but we are seeing the beginnings of it, particularly with the Supreme Court deciding on the New Haven firefighters case. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/52 "2009-07-17T20:32:31Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > That works if someone calls you a moron, but what if they call you a dick? Well right now I am soft dick, but if you keep pushing up against me I might change my position on that. ---
**Author:** ![Marienee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@Marienee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marienee)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/53 "2009-07-17T20:34:19Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > What concerns me most is the idea that she railroads lawyers that Senator Graham brought up. I don’t know how much he was cherry-picking though. Well, there might be some concern that she could compete for “Chief Bully” with Justice Scalia. But the Court seems to have survived all its previous bullies, and at least there are nine of them so the others can cushion the blow. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/54 "2009-07-17T20:35:59Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Well right now I am soft dick, but if you keep pushing up against me I might change my position on that. A strict dinner and a show minimum. No exceptions. Well, not very many. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/55 "2009-07-17T20:37:09Z")
> [@Dangerosa](#): > > As far as I can tell - that’s pretty much mainstream thought whatever group of people you are in. I would hope that if that group is “Supreme Court justices” it would not be. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/56 "2009-07-17T20:39:22Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I would hope that if that group is “Supreme Court justices” it would not be. > > Regards, > Shodan My best friend in high school was Warren Burger’s niece. You would hope such would be the case…my experience is that Supreme Court justices are human beings. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/57 "2009-07-17T20:42:54Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > If she was talking about being wiser in all subjects and circumstances, sure, that would be racist. I don’t think it’s racist to say that a Latina would have more insight than a white person into issues that directly effect Latinas is racist, though. Rather, it strikes me as entirely self-evident. Being able to better see one aspect of a case does not necessarily equate with one generating a wiser decision. It’s just as likely that she/he give it too much weight. Also, you are assuming that being a member of a group automatically equates with a better understanding of the case. I don’t buy that. ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/58 "2009-07-17T20:47:55Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Being able to better see one aspect of a case does not necessarily equate with one generating a wiser decision. It’s just as likely that she/he give it too much weight. Also, you are assuming that being a member of a group automatically equates with a better understanding of the case. I don’t buy that. I would say that problem is qualified by the “wise” part. A wise person isn’t likely to give it too much weight, and a wise person would generally equate with a better understanding. ---
**Author:** ![Chessic\_Sense](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/7c8e57/32.png) [@Chessic\_Sense](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chessic_Sense)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 8:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/59 "2009-07-17T20:49:14Z")
> [@El\_Kabong](#): > > You know, the particular single statement, apparently cherry-picked from a single speech made more than a decade ago > [@Gangster\_Octopus](#): > > She said something carelessly about ten years ago. YAWN. She’s reiterated these statements several times over many years. I’ve heard at least three of the commentators on NPR say that it wouldn’t be a big deal, if only she’d not repeated these sentiments in speaking engagements over several years. What are those speeches? What did she say exactly? I dunno, ask the NPR guys. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2009, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269/60 "2009-07-17T21:00:18Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > I would say that problem is qualified by the “wise” part. A wise person isn’t likely to give it too much weight, and a wise person would generally equate with a better understanding. Well, if you start to equate “wise” with infallible, or omniscient, wouldn’t that hold for the white male, as well? There are many aspects of a case. assuming one’s ethnic background might give one a clearer view through one prism does not meant that they have the same appreciation of all other views of the case. Again, I can buy the argument that a diverse court helps ensure that the court, in total, would have a greater appreciation for more aspects of a case, but that doesn’t equate to the individual. I have this odd notion that people of different races are basically equal in ability. Now, if you’d like to offer evidence that supports the idea that Latinos or Latinas or Woman are more intelligent or wiser, as a rule, I’d be happy to hear it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sotomayor-maybe-a-racist-definitely-an-egomaniac/503269.md?page=4)